Welcome to DBSTalk

Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!

The steep drop off is that if no carriage agreement with DIRECTV is signed before the 11/4 game at Detroit, there are no more alternative national broadcasts scheduled for 12 consecutive games until the end of November on 11/30 for Denver at the Lakers --- 7:30 pm on ESPN ch. 206.

The first regular season Los Angeles Lakers game scheduled to air on Time Warner Cable's new SportsNet channel is just a week away and the cable company still does not have any distribution deals with other pay-TV providers in the region.

If Time Warner Cable doesn't get deals done soon, millions of Lakers fans will be missing a lot of basketball.

On Wednesday, Cox Cable, which has 1.2 million subscribers in Southern California, primarily in Orange County and San Diego, said its offer to carry SportsNet and Time Warner Cable's Spanish-language sports channel Deportes on a specialty tier along with other sports channels was rebuffed.

"We are committed to meeting the needs of all Cox customers, not just sports fans," Cox said in a statement, adding that "the price for the Lakers is one of the highest wholesale prices that we have seen."

Time Warner Cable is seeking as much as $3.95 per-month, per-subscriber for the two channels. The two channels launched Oct. 1. Besides the Lakers, SportsNet and Deportes also carry the Los Angeles Galaxy soccer team. Time Warner Cable is also expected to pursue rights to the Dodgers, whose contract with Fox's Prime Ticket regional sports channel expires after next season.

"I think it is extremely expensive for basically a one-team channel," said Dave Bialis, senior vice president of Cox's California operations.

Although Cox offered to make the two channels available on an a la carte basis, Time Warner Cable has consistently said that it wants the channels available to as many homes as possible and not sold separately.

"We’d like to see flexibility in the offering and allow our customers to have more say," Bialis said.

A Time Warner Cable spokesman did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

For Time Warner Cable, the channels are a big bet. The company acquired the rights to the Lakers in a $3-billion, 20-year deal. Previously, the Lakers had been carried primarily by Fox Sports West, which is another regional sports network owned by Fox.

Besides Cox, the other major distributors that Time Warner Cable needs to have on board include satellite broadcasters DirecTV and Dish Network.

SportsNet and Deportes will carry 53 of the Lakers' 82 games. The rest are national games that will be telecast by ESPN, TNT and ABC.

Any assertion that we are the highest priced regional sports outlet in the country is simply untrue; as a significant buyer of regional sports across the country, we know that there are higher priced regional sports networks, including Root Sports that we buy from DirecTV.

Cox and DirecTV know that there is no regional sports network anywhere in the country that is offered on an optional tier -- that would be unprecedented.

If Cox or DirecTV choose not to carry our networks, we and their customers will be very disappointed but we are confident there will be other alternatives for their customers to see this highly-anticipated Lakers season.

Cox and DirecTV know that there is no regional sports network anywhere in the country that is offered on an optional tier -- that would be unprecedented.

and there is no regional sports network that comes with a Spanish channel that they want in a basic pack.

Now are they ok with the Spanish channel being in a optional Spanish pack?

That may be one of the key elements, and how they are both spinning things. I'd bet that twc is saying they may pay as much for root as they are asking for one of their channels, and cox and DirecTV are probably looking at the total cost of both channels, in part because twc apparently is only selling them as a package deal. Twc can't have it both ways.

Of course one thing that twc is forgetting, they are adding a third RSN to the area, meaning that suddenly the price for the exact same sports is increasing by the full amount of what they are asking, which will have to result in a direct hit to our bills.

I think that explains what I thought would happen with new networks on the most part. Sports pack, ala carte or bussed basically.

Yeah, I'd say unless its dirt cheap, DirecTV doesn't want to add any new networks unless its in its own package or a la cart.... They really don't need any new channels to keep or gain customers, except maybe new RSN channels as they come along.

It's going to get more nastier in the press between TWC vs. D* and the other TV providers the longer this dispute continues to drag on

TWC is full of @#$@ in that article. A commenter correctly points that out. TWC wants $3.95 for their channel while Root Sports charges $2.36 and $3.26 respectively. So for TWC to claim they pay Directv more for Root Sports than what they are asking for of their Lakers channel is a blatant lie.

Furthermore, Root Sports Pittsburgh (which charges $3.26) has the Pirate and Penguins, about 225 games in total. The Lakers channel will deliver 57 I believe.

Cox and DirecTV know that there is no regional sports network anywhere in the country that is offered on an optional tier -- that would be unprecedented.

and there is no regional sports network that comes with a Spanish channel that they want in a basic pack.

Now are they ok with the Spanish channel being in a optional Spanish pack?

You are thinking old school. Cox, DTV and others are trying to change the paradigm. What happened in the past is in the past, the world has changed. Directv leadership in their own statements are clear on this,

"DIRECTV CFO Pat Doyle was recently quoted in a BusinessWeek report as saying that the "dialogue" around sports networks needs to change so that only "the people that want sports ... pay for sports."

The same article cites DIRECTV CEO Mike White as saying that, if he had a magic wand, "the first thing I would peel off is regional sports networks." He added, "The cost is just too high."

Their margins are shrinking drastically over the last few years with 10%+ programming cost increases that they cannot pass on to customers at the same rate. In the "old" days of 5 or 10 years ago, sports programming was high but not this high. So deals made then should not be compared to the landscape of today. Furthermore, deals today often involve only a few teams, thus further adding on to cost while they still have to pay for the former RSN and whatever scraps they keep on their network.

I would not be surprised if DTV adds the Lakers, but I would equally not be shocked if they never add Pac 12, Houston, Philadelphia, Northwest or when new contracts come up that they no longer continue to carry them. Yes, their brand was build somewhat on sports, but even then sports customers only make up about 35% of their base. They are alinating far more customers that are not sports fans with huge price increases for sports content their non-sports customers don't care about. They cannot ignore those 65%.

Most of you probably don't know why Dish abandoned New York years ago. Most of it was due to the regional sports network costs. When you add MSG, SNY, YES, MSG+ the cost to a Dish or Fios or DTV is about $18 to $20 a month per subscriber. Think about that for a moment. They are charging $60 for a basic package and $20 of it is coming from 4 channels that many people don't care about. Now add in the cost of ESPN, another $4+, and CNN, FOX, Bravo, etc, etc, etc and whe you add it all up, these guys are making next to nothing on those packages. No money to reinvest in their business.

The distributors see this loud and clear and DTV is trying to change the conversation. They may fail, they will lose some subscribers, but their goal is to stay in business because the world has changed. It cannot go on like it has. The more and more that the DTV's and others push back, the chance of sports sanity in the cost structure might take hold. Might.

We've all seen this movie before. Mudslinging, lies, "looking out for customer's best interest" (my favorite by the way ), blah blah blah. Just get the deal done already. Raise my bill if need be. Go Lakers!

TWC is full of @#$@ in that article. A commenter correctly points that out. TWC wants $3.95 for their channel while Root Sports charges $2.36 and $3.26 respectively. So for TWC to claim they pay Directv more for Root Sports than what they are asking for of their Lakers channel is a blatant lie.

Furthermore, Root Sports Pittsburgh (which charges $3.26) has the Pirate and Penguins, about 225 games in total. The Lakers channel will deliver 57 I believe.

TWC is flat full of @#$% on this claim.

Technically, TWC is right. Remember that the $3.95/mo price is for both TWC SportsNet and TWC Deportes combined, so each by itself would average only $1.98/mo (below ROOT's price).

Again, that's technically speaking. For all intents and purposes, they are asking for more than DirecTV asks for basically the same type of programming.

Technically, TWC is right. Remember that the $3.95/mo price is for both TWC SportsNet and TWC Deportes combined, so each by itself would average only $1.98/mo (below ROOT's price).

Again, that's technically speaking. For all intents and purposes, they are asking for more than DirecTV asks for basically the same type of programming.

TWC is not even technically right, as they are not offering the channels on an individual basis to providers, as far as we know. Who cares if they pencil out to $1.98 each if you are forced to buy BOTH, or nothing at all?

TWC is not even technically right, as they are not offering the channels on an individual basis to providers, as far as we know. Who cares if they pencil out to $1.98 each if you are forced to buy BOTH, or nothing at all?

Especially if they are trying to force equal distribution of the two channels as well.

TWC is full of @#$@ in that article. A commenter correctly points that out. TWC wants $3.95 for their channel while Root Sports charges $2.36 and $3.26 respectively. So for TWC to claim they pay Directv more for Root Sports than what they are asking for of their Lakers channel is a blatant lie.

Furthermore, Root Sports Pittsburgh (which charges $3.26) has the Pirate and Penguins, about 225 games in total. The Lakers channel will deliver 57 I believe.

TWC is flat full of @#$% on this claim.

There will be a lot more than 57 games on the Lakers channel. You are forgetting the sparks, Galaxy and a bunch of college football and basketball games. With that said, I know the penguins are popular, although not even playing now, and possibly this year, but how popular are the pirates these days? I really don't know... The Lakers though, they are big. Comparison wise, the Lakers are Yankees big in the nba. I think that's got twc thinking they can get more than they should be asking. I wish DirecTV had tried to get the Lakers rights via a new roots channel...

"DIRECTV CFO Pat Doyle was recently quoted in a BusinessWeek report as saying that the "dialogue" around sports networks needs to change so that only "the people that want sports ... pay for sports."

The same article cites DIRECTV CEO Mike White as saying that, if he had a magic wand, "the first thing I would peel off is regional sports networks." He added, "The cost is just too high."

I really hope D* sticks to this and other operators join them. If MSOs united and put sports channels a la carte, these ridiculous new networks would have to come down to a reasonable level justified by the marketplace. I say this as a huge sports fan, the fact that every team is now so greedy that they think they need their own channel is getting ridiculous.

If I was D*, I would lower all packages by $10/month and put the ESPN channels and your local RSNs in a $10/month addon. ESPN and the RSNs would not allow it and if they don't, drop them. You would lose customers to be sure but I think if D* made it clear to the public with an offer like this how much non-sports fans are paying for these channels that they would be OK in the long run.

And that is where the sticking point is. TWC wants Cox and DirecTV to raise everyone's bill. Cox and DirecTV only want to raise the bill for those who actually care about the Lakers. At most, that would be 35% of the entire DirecTV subscriber base, but it might be less than 10%.

But why needs MY bill be raised by that much? I don't watch Lakers.I do watch Galaxy, but they are worth $0.50 out of that $4.

I think I am not alone on this, even among Lakers fans: Why should this year's Lakers games be $4 more expensive than last years Lakers games?

[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

But why needs MY bill be raised by that much? I don't watch Lakers.I do watch Galaxy, but they are worth $0.50 out of that $4.

I think I am not alone on this, even among Lakers fans: Why should this year's Lakers games be $4 more expensive than last years Lakers games?

I agree. I'm in Houston, so I am facing the same thing with CSN Houston for the Rockets and Astros. If my bill goes up $50/year for the addition of the Lakers channel, I will seriously consider leaving DirecTV.

One question I have - since I am outside of the Lakers DMA, would I still see the Lakers Home games on the Lakers Channel? Would that take revenue away from the NBA league pass?

One question I have - since I am outside of the Lakers DMA, would I still see the Lakers Home games on the Lakers Channel? Would that take revenue away from the NBA league pass?

The way I understand it, if you are OUTSIDE the Lakers DMA, and in the case there is no agreement with TWC Sportsnet, NBA Leaguepass will use the opposing teams feed for the games with the lakers, so NO home feeds.

[Disclaimer] The definition of "soon" is based solely on DirecTV's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "soon" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

I agree. I'm in Houston, so I am facing the same thing with CSN Houston for the Rockets and Astros. If my bill goes up $50/year for the addition of the Lakers channel, I will seriously consider leaving DirecTV.

One question I have - since I am outside of the Lakers DMA, would I still see the Lakers Home games on the Lakers Channel? Would that take revenue away from the NBA league pass?

No, you would need NBA League Pass to receive the Lakers games through a national feed TWC SN is providing DIRECTV and other carriers for that purpose.

Even if DIRECTV comes to a deal to carry TWC SN you would still need LP to see the actual games, but if you subscribe to Sports Pack you can receive the non-game programming on TWC SN.

No, you would need NBA League Pass to receive the Lakers games through a national feed TWC SN is providing DIRECTV and other carriers for that purpose.

Even if DIRECTV comes to a deal to carry TWC SN you would still need LP to see the actual games, but if you subscribe to Sports Pack you can receive the non-game programming on TWC SN.

If that's the case, then these team owned networks almost have to be on some type of a la carte system. Do you really think DirecTV will have different price packages for each DMA? Why would I want to pay $4 per month for TWC SN if I cannot watch the channels without also paying for League Pass? Same for CSN Houston - why would someone outside of the Rockets or Astros DMA want to pay for the channel if they could not watch the games on the channel?

If that's the case, then these team owned networks almost have to be on some type of a la carte system. Do you really think DirecTV will have different price packages for each DMA? Why would I want to pay $4 per month for TWC SN if I cannot watch the channels without also paying for League Pass? Same for CSN Houston - why would someone outside of the Rockets or Astros DMA want to pay for the channel if they could not watch the games on the channel?

Most markets only have one RSN for all their sports. There is only a few like Los Angeles that have multiple. And we now have three. That's the problem. Three is ridiculous when they want us to pay for all three one third more (or more) than what we where paying before for the exact same amount of sports.